Skip to main content

tv   Meet the Press  MSNBC  November 29, 2010 4:00am-5:00am EST

4:00 am
and while smoke and fire may continue to ground flights daily, they are less likely to result in a catastrophic failures of the past. this sunday, back to work for the president and congress, but what will actually get done in a lame-duck session? we will debate discussion on the start treaty with russia. will the debt commissions ideas for slashing the deficit go anywhere? plus, will north korea attack on the south engage, after it it
4:01 am
was warned that a military exercise that began hours ago can put the region on the brink of war. with us this evening, dick durbin, assistant ma jordan leader. and senator jon kyl, assistant minority leader. battleground 2012 is taking place. who are the potential candidates to watch and which are the issues to watch most? and we have weighing in e.j. dionne with "the washington post" and ed gillespie and peggy noonan and democratic mayor of philadelphia michael nutter. captions paid for by nbc-universal television good morning, just hours ago the planned joint military hours
4:02 am
with south korea began in the waters south of north korea. joining me with the latest on the tensions is richardeningle. richard, what is your sense on the ground there? is this about to get worse before it gets better? >>. >> reporter: mixed indications. people here don't seem like they want a war, but all of the pieces are in place for a very dangerous situation. you have american military hardware brought into the regions. these joint exercises now underway, which the north korean government is perceiving as a direct threat. and north korea has positioned surface to air missiles to the coast and has moved longer range missiles to launch pads and has gotten ready some anti-ship
4:03 am
missiles, so it wouldn't take much for this crisis which is at a rhetoric stage now, to escalate further, david. >> what do the north koreans want? they want to step up the talks, but how do you read north korea and their desires? >> reporter: analysts believe this has to do with domestic politics inside north korea. they want to re-engage in the nuclear discussions, but there is an issue of transition it is dealing with. the north korean dictator had a stroke, is ill and is trying to pass on authority to his 27-year-old son. just last september the son was promoted to a four-star general position and now the son has to prove, according to officials here, that he is a military man and can hand thl situation. if you look at it from the way it's viewed here.
4:04 am
people are saying this is a war designed and being carried out for the benefit of a 27-year-old little prince. >> before i let you go, richard, the country here is poised for more secret documents being released with regard to u.s. key relationships around the globe. how bad is this going to be? >> reporter: this devastating. i have spoken to many senior u.s. mill trilt officials mil military officials. they use words like treason and breach of. they wonder how this league could do this, bring out hundreds of thousands of cables, internal documents that are supposed to be within the ranks of politicians and diplomats and
4:05 am
embassies, how such a low level person within the military could have pass this had on to a foreign agent that is now putting them online. this is a major breach and people are wondering will there be an examination on how america's examination is kept secure. >> richard, from south korea, appreciate it. joining me live is dick durbin and john kyle jon kyl. a lot to get to. senator kyl, how should this end and what should the president do? >> i don't know how it ends, but what we ought to do is what we are doing right now, not backing down in terms of legitimate exercises with the south korean government which we gave advance notice of. obviously we are not trying to provoke anything there, but with
4:06 am
news the ieae from the united nations indicated how north korea is proliferating technology to iran and others. this needs to be dealt with. >> the headline china addresses rising korean tensions. they want to tamp it down, but they are the power player here. do they have to deal with north korea rather than the united states? >> i spoke with secretary of state clinton last night. we both agree that china can play a valuable role in bringing under a situation volatile. at this point in time we need to make certain we stand strong in our alliance with south korea. this thing calls on us to be more bipartisan and more
4:07 am
constructive in our efforts in washington. >> shouldn't any attack on south korea be viewed as an attack on the united states? >> i'm not going further than what the president said. we have a strong stance with south korea. it is a treaty that goes back to 50 years. >> this start treaty, this is the reduction of arms treaty that the president said is a priority for this lame-duck session. you seem to be a key player. you have said there is no chance the start treaty can be completed in the lame-duck session. is that your view? >> it is. and more of reality than anything. if senator reed wouid would all time, it could be finished.
4:08 am
but there are priorities. are they going to deal with the funding of the government for the rest of the fiscal year. they have to do that. they have to deal with the issue on everybody's mind, to ensure that we don't have big tax increase, the largest in the history of the country. these are priority items. if we do those things and deal with the other political issues that senator reid said he wants to deal with, then -- >> here is the issue. can you get around senator kyl? you need nine votes. can you get there? >> when it comes to this issue we respect jon kyl. i think he has worked harder than maybe any senator to understand the issue and be part of the policy decisions we face. here is the reality. we live in a dangerous world. the failure of the united states senate to ratify the start treaty is going to pose a danger. let me give an analogy.
4:09 am
it wasn't that long ago that president george w. bush appealed to congress to rewrite our intelligence agencies with a new department of department of homeland security. susan collins, joe lieberman, a democrat, got together and did it. they have constructed this new scenario and did it during a lame-duck session. there is no excuse for us to ignore that responsibility and wait several months. while we wait, there will be no inspectors on the ground in russia to make sure that their nuclear weapons are safe and treaty compliant. >> senator kyl, what do you need the time for? "the new york times" reported --
4:10 am
is this anything other than trying to snub the president, senator? >> of course. harry reid, the leader of the senate can bring the start treaty up any time he wants to. but he has a different ajen dachlt da. he has made promises, the dream act, the don't-ask-don't-tell policy to appeal to the gay and lesbian communities, in addition to other various political commitments he has made, we have to funneled td the government f remaining ten months of the fiscal year. >> what's the -- >> david, may i finish? >> what about the treaty? >> as i told you, you can't do everything. i was stating it as a matter of
4:11 am
real reality, not policy. how can he deal with all of that when the start treaty by itself could take two weeks. >> how long did the last one take? >> we have three weeks to go before the christmas recess. there are, in my opinion, a lot of amendments to be raced on th raised on this treaty. >> how long did the last start treaty take to get through congress? >> it's not comparable. the last one was a three-page document. i think the vote was unanimous. this is not going to be the case with this treaty in which there are a lot of issues. >> senator durbin? >> people across america who subscribe to c span ask for refunds when they see congress
4:12 am
cysti sitting there day after day on the lame-duck session. we can get it done. the fact is we can get all of the things he mentioned, debate them and vote on them in a responsible way before we break for christmas. to do otherwise is to create a dangerous situation. i agree with mr. luger. it's type to step up. in arai ran, they announced yesterday they were going to fire up their nuclear reactor. russia has helped us in dealing with the threat in iran. to ignore this start treaty does not help us with russia in a critical period. >> i want to the zero in on one point.
4:13 am
substantively -- the old start treaty took a matter of days -- but what substantively are you not getting from the white house to say, yes, i can get this. >> let me quote "the washington post" which directly addressed the question you asked. no calamity will befall if the senate doesn't get this done this year. the associated press did a fact check and said the urgency is political. even the administration concedes the wrist riwris -- risk is not immediate. there are provisions that deal with the treaty and missile defense and global strike and other issues. secondly we have modernization, which as senator durbin pointed out, i have been primarily focused on. third, you have -- is this all
4:14 am
that's standing between us today and the administration trying to negotiate deeper, further cuts, which it has indicate it had wants to do in its march towards global zee he row zero. there are a lot of the considerations. we would like one or two. one of the things the administration has done with regard to building our nuclear complex back up, replacing the manhattan era buildings, for example, facilities, is to create two new buildings, which will be necessary, one in tennessee and one in new mexico. these buildings are costly, but they have stretched out the cost so it doesn't show up in the ten-year projections to be completed by 2023 and 2024. we need those facilities before then. as a result, there probably be amendments or at least an effort to get the administration to funnel fund those earlier.
4:15 am
every year we delay those is at a cost of millions. >> i want to the get to taxes and spending. but, first, we are coming off the hol daiday weekend and ther was so much debate about the tsa screenings. is this debate over? does the administration need to secure a better way to secure americans at airports and potential plots? >> we want to the respect people's privacy, but when you get on a plane, you want to know the government has done everything they could to keep you safe. a grand total of 1% of passengers across america basically objected to the process they were being offered. 1%, and we were tied in knots over this. it is not an easy assignment to tsa to say keep it safe, but don't go too far. they are trying to strike the
4:16 am
right balance. congress needs to continue to ask questions, but the bottom line is we want to be safe when we get on the planes rather than going too far. >> vulnerable for passengers if terrorists were to strike at the security line. this is indelicate, but there are ways to hide explosives on one's person that even these more invasive security procedures cannot deal with. is there a way? >> i think there are other things that can be done in addition to what is being done. that is to focus on the person rather than the weapon. this is what countries, do they profile, not on the basis of race or ethnicity, button the bas but on who may need an additional screening. there are tips that tip the screeners off. the intelligence has better
4:17 am
intelligence than tsa. they need to share that. there is an opportunity for prescreening who don't need to be screened because they have an advance check or eye print or fingerprint. there are about 60,000 people every day traveling that get this pat-down procedure. we were in the netherlands right after the christmas bomber. they use a scanner which uses a mannequ mannequin, a stick figure, so the image is not your body or your body, but a mannequin. it's just a matter of software. tsa says they are looking at it. i think there are other things we can do that might enable them to back off patting down the saying little old ladies and kids. >> senator durbin, president obama will sit down with
4:18 am
incomings republican leaders and mcconnell when he comes back to washington -- he's in washington, but when he meets with him this week. how should he approach this meeting and specifically on bush tax cuts? is he in a position to compromise? >> i don't want to speak for the white house, but i think their position is one that i share at least initially. we ought to say to the vast majority of middle america's working class, your tax cuts will be protected permanently. let's move forward in a positive way. there are a lot of concerns, and i'm sure senator kyl will raise his concerns as well. i'm a member of the deficit commission. it's one of the toughest assignments i've ever had. all of the cuts we are proposing in the deficit commission for the next ten years equal the republican proposal in tax cuts.
4:19 am
if the republicans go forward with the tacx cuts they want an we make the spending cuts, we will still have the same basic deficit. we will be borrowing 40 cents out of every dollar we spend. >> do you see the administration agreeing to extend the tax cuts for the middle class and upper class for at least a year? >> we need to sit down. maybe the meeting with the president will kick it off. we have unemployment running out by christmas. 2 million americans will lose their unemployment benefits because they expire, 120,000 of them in my home state of illinois. the child care tax credit and making work pay tax credit need to be part of this conversation. we need to be focusing on what it takes to move this economy
4:20 am
forward. should not be worrying about the discomfort of the wealthy, but the fact that people are struggling to survive because they have no job and no means to keep the family together in these difficult times. supply we seeing the outline of negotiation strategies, to extend jobless insurance for those without a job, that maybe there would be negotiating room on tax cuts? >> all of the things dick mentioned have to be done. we have a lot on our plate before christmas. all of these things need to be done. let me make something clear. nobody is talking about tax cuts. we have had the rates in existence now for ten years. all republicans are saying keep them in place. don't raise taxes on anyone. the job creators in this country are the ones that would be hurt the most by an increase in taxes. our position is let's extend all of the currents rates for some period of time. obviously we would like to do it permanently, but if it's three or four years, that's fine, too.
4:21 am
i think there is an opportunity for us to sit down and negotiate a regular lugs of this resolution of this. >> could you support the middle class tax cuts, and then coming back after the first of the year and taking position on the upper level earners. >> our position is there should be no tax increase on anybody, particularly in this time of economic difficulties. especially the job creators, the small business folks who would get hurt the most. they are the ones who create the job opportunities and frankly, represent about 25% of all of the workers in the country. they don't need their taxes raised. frankly, that can be done in this lame-duck session. if we have the time to do it, we sit down and work it out and focus priorities there. >> that's a no. you would not vote for a middle class tax cut extension if it did not include upper earners.
4:22 am
>> we don't believe tax should be increased on anyone. the upper earners you are talking about are the small businesses i'm talking about. >> the number one goal of republicans say their goal is to have president obama removed from office after his first term. is that the accomplishment you think about republicans achieving? >> he was talking about a political goal. president obama has as his goal re-election, so no surprise there. when you asked me what could be done before christmas was the agenda the american people want to operate on. keep with the unemployment. deal with the taxes to make sure we don't have the a tax increase. those are the things that we need the most. i think if he would do work in a spirit of goodwill, we can achieve it. here is the headline. it doesn't look like nancy
4:23 am
pelosi, the speaker of the house is going to be encouraging of dick durbin and i sitting down and working this out. >> senator durbin, you know this president well, you encouraged him to run for presidenty. as he faces the aftereffects of a difficult midterm election, what are your feelings of what political recovery looks like for him? >> the president is meeting with the leaders, democrats and republicans in the white house tuesday. it's the beginning of i hope a constructive approach. i don't know what senator mcconnell's position was, publicly he make sure president obama isn't re-elected. i don't think that's the issue. the issue is getting people back to work, deal with the wars that men and women are dealing with in their homes.
4:24 am
reliving and re-harnihashing th problems of the past is not productive. people say we go to work every single day, why won't the senate do the same thing. i i think we can, but we need a more positive approach. the president will bring us together tuesday in annish effort to initiate that. >> we are going to leave it there. senators, thank you very much. coming up shall -- the battleground for 2012 and the race for the bhous white house. who are the candidates to watch? we have the press weighing in, peggy
4:25 am
4:26 am
4:27 am
4:28 am
4:29 am
4:30 am
4:31 am
we're back with our political round tal joining me. joining me is peggy noonan, "washington post" e.j. dionne, former chairman of the committee ed gillespie and philadelphia mayor michael nutter. great to have you here. before we get to the 2012 discussion, about the president's leadership overall. it's such an important topic. based on my reporting, i've said
4:32 am
the left is disappointed, middle disaffected, right resurgent. it's a difficult landscape for him to deal with. you said something to "politico" in 2008. nutter says obama still basking in the glow of a mandate victory, must be straight with people in tough times. do you have manage expectations, he said. i jokingly said i was elected mayor not monarch. he has come off a terrible midterm election. certainly doesn't walk on water. is he managing expectations the way you said he should? >> first, david. none of us walk on water. there's a harsh reality to this economy. people are in pain, upset,
4:33 am
angry, frustrated, all those things and more. managing expectations certainly is a big part of the job. he's been in the job less than two years. it took a long time to get where we're going. people ignore all the things that have happened, financial recovery, economic recovery package, health care, civil rights and a number of other steps and investments that president obama has taken, all of which gets washed almost to the side by the daily doom and gloom people read in the newspaper, see on tv or are experiencing themselves. it's tough to break through all of that. the president has done a great job. any of us could do better, i think he's acknowledged that a number of times, managing expectations is a big part of this job. >> also leadership, peggy noonan. where are his leadership moments? where is he connected to the american public? where do they maintain faith with him, when he meets he'll be the most popular political figure in the room, which still
4:34 am
stands for something, but he still faces a lot of challenges. >> he does. i think to get beyond the trouble he's in now, to show responsiveness, to show he's in touch with the feeling of the american people is to act as if the 2010 election happened. do you know what i mean? a big message was sent in that big wave. don't make believe it didn't happen. i'm hearing you. i know it's happening. start a bipartisan moderation to the extent he can. i think he can move forward with republicans on taxes in a way that makes the public say, wow, that's pretty good. extend it. he could do the same thing, it seems to me, on s.t.a.r.t., if he brings in the past republican leaders who have supported s.t.a.r.t. in the past. george h.w. bush, george w. bush. be bipartisan. be big. receive the message of 2010 and transcend it as a bipartisan figure.
4:35 am
>> e.j., it's not just his left being disappointed, but that is a big piece, whether a supporter on the left or an independent who voted for president obama, you may feel betrayed. whether it's don't ask, don't tell, or i'm going to close guantanamo bay, there's all these things and there's a feeling he hasn't exercised his leadership to get this done? does he still face that test? >> some of the criticism is unfair to say a guy who had all these things done, health care was a hugely difficult thing to get past and financial reform and the stimulus. a lot of us thought it should have been bigger but it kept us from falling into a catastrophe. i think where he's got problems with the left and parts of the center is a sense of what are you going to fight for, when are you going to stand up to these guys. if the republican bargaining position is what's yours is mine and what's mine is mine, if they are not doing to give an inch, then i think his core supporters
4:36 am
but also the american people want somebody strong in the white house, wanted to call them on it. i thought this senator kyl on the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty, i think this is an amazing position he's taking. this is something supported by the entire range of conservative opinion from bob kagan to pat baker, to henry kissinger, james baker iii. i don't know why he's opposing this. i think it was unclear from his answer. >> let me start with ed gillespie. there was a cartoon i'll put up on the screen. the slug is cold war 2010. what you have at the at the table are russia and united states on one side and republicans on the other. ed, is this a test of whether bipartisanship is real, whether the president has the ability to make the politics tough enough for republicans that they have to say yes? >> the problem is they are a day late and dollar short in terms of the s.t.a.r.t. treaty and working with congress on it.
4:37 am
what's so extraordinary to me about this meeting with congressional leaders coming up is that it's extraordinary. the fact is president obama does not have a working relationship with republicans in congress and not many democrats in congress either. senator kyl has been asking legitimate questions for a long time about the s.t.a.r.t. treaty. he's the number two republican in the senate. he's the leader in our party on these nuclear weapons issues. the white house has essentially acted as if they are getting mail from a college intern working for a freshman -- >> that's not true. >> the white house made concession after concession to john kyl. he want a modernized nuclear force, they said great. there's been 12 hearings or something like that. >> the white house didn't focus -- >> they are trying to work around him. that's a mistake. >> they are astonished by this position. >> i have to make a comment. you made a comment at the start, which i greatly respect and admire, president obama almost
4:38 am
reinvented bipartisanship. do we forget what happened in the economic recovery act? no house republican voted for it. only three republican senators voted for it. $787 billion package to move this country out of near financial collapse and one of the senators from pennsylvania was almost run out of his party. what are we talking about? senator mcconnell said his number one goal, main apparently mission in life now, is to take president obama out of office. that's bipartisanship? i don't think so. >> it's not bipartisanship either when at the meeting of the house republicans when talking about the stimulus package and they offer their suggestions and president obama's response at the time was i won. i don't have to take your ideas. he chose a course of pursuing a straight democratic party vote -- >> now they have -- >> i agree. >> here is the question, peggy noonan, what does the president do to confound his critics? that was an observation he made in the past he has not done very well. here are opportunities. whether it's tax cuts, the
4:39 am
s.t.a.r.t. treaty whether it's going to be the debt commission, where is he going to make the politics difficult for republicans? i you talked to republicans who say he's making it very easy to say no, and that's been the case for 22 months. >> i'm afraid i'll be repeating my point. i see no sign, really, that the obama white house has decided we have to really change the way we're going forward here. they don't seem -- it seems -- when i look at them, i see people who think it's a concession to some new reality they don't want if they admit 2010 actually changed things, changed our numbers on the hill, et cetera. if the president sort of shakes himself, dusts himself off, and comes forward and says, guys, i'm going to work with you on this tax stuff, everybody in america has to know what their tax rates are going to be for the next year, two years, three years, it is irresponsible not to do it. i'm working with you, i will concede a lot.
4:40 am
going to let this thing go forward. >> you made a point about the tax, could be a huge mistake for the president, if democrats stand by working people, to not extend tax benefits at the same time you're extending for upper earners. >> it would be astonishing. there are five unemployed people for every job in america. the average payment on unemployment compensation is $290 a week. this tax cut for the rich people is $100,000 or more for every millionaire. it would be absurd not to help the unemployed at the moment when we've got almost 10% unemployment and unemployment compensation has a bigger bang for the buck. >> i think the president on the tax cut has gone more than out of his way. in fact, i think he's made too many premature concessions to the republicans. yes, i think he should say, let's talk about this. i think you laid out a good solution in the question, pass a tax cut for the middle class everybody agrees on. if this is such a high priority for republicans to pass a tax cut for the rich, let them do it in the next congress.
4:41 am
>> let me quickly, before i take a break, mayor nutter, the issue we've been dealing with over the holiday season here, the tsa patdowns. is there a better way? is the administration going to have to revisit the issue? >> well, security matters are always subject to review. i go through the airport, everyone wants everyone to be safe, not particularly intrusive. sometimes you run into conflicts there. can it be done differently or better? i'm sure they can figure out a way to get people through. but apparently everyone got to see grandma for thanksgiving, without a whole lot of lines or nonsen nonsense. everyone wants to be safe on an airplane. that's the bottom line. we seem to forget how we arrived at this point. full body scan, off into a separate room. every security measure is subject to review. you always want to do something better. the bottom line is safety on an airplane. >> what's that? >> after eight years you might want to rethink it. we started out here, we added
4:42 am
this, added this, now we're doing this. stop, look back, rethink the whole thing with an eye to what will work in terms of real safety and what is unacceptable treatment. >> here is what the bush administration understood. the american people are here after 9/11, maybe they are here now. they can get back to here in a moment. as the president said over the weekend, if somebody gets through and blows up an airplane, people aren't going to say, they shouldn't have had those extensive patdowns. >> the challenge for government is -- having worked in the white house, there's a tradeoff between security and individual liberty you constantly are trying to get right. the line moves depending on where public sentiment is, and it's moved. i think this has probably going to have to be done by technology most likely here. >> with airplanes grounded in the united states, freight airplanes with concern about bombs and cartridges. this threat is not over. we need to pay attention to it. >> we're going to take a break here.
4:43 am
we're going to come back and talk about battleground 2012. yes, it's already upon us. how does it look, sarah palin to other republicans challenging the president potentially. more from our roundtable right the president potentially. more from our roundtable right after this. [ female announcer ] swiffer sweeper is 2 in 1. it sweeps and it mops. your old broom just can't compare. [ funny voice ] hey, broom! wanna sweep and mop like swiffer sweeper? then try the mop club for brooms! designed to look natural, even when wet. ♪ [ female announcer ] sorry, broom, but swiffer sweeper's electrostatic dry cloths attract and lock more dirt than a broom. and the dirt dissolving wet cloths clean better than a mop, or your money back. ♪ she blinded me with science
4:44 am
4:45 am
4:46 am
we're back with more of our roundtable. if you don't believe things are rough in washington, just look
4:47 am
at the "new york post." no republicans involved and he still got a fat lip from playing basketball. he took an elbow to the lip. he's at a game yesterday and they have done a good job. doesn't look like too much of an emergency. it wasn't easy. who has sharp elbows, even the guys you play ball with. >> rough-and-tumble. >> we remember when president bush would go mountain biking and come back with his face scratched up. these are active presidents. let's look at what are the issues that are really going to be the ramp up to the 2012 race. here is a poll indicating where things stand, 48% saying they will vote against obama if the election were held today. it's not held today. here are some of the republicans polling in double digits at the moment. you see romney, michalhuckabee,.
4:48 am
you see only order on the republican side is disorder in terms of the big question, who are you going to nominate? >> it's an exciting time. we have a big field. you saw an extensive field, all of whom have a shot. i think that's good for the party. i think new faces are helpful. i think the more people bring to the caucuses in iowa, primaries in new hampshire, the better off we are as a party. i was one to watch a pretty competitive democratic primary, senator clinton and obama and thought it was good for the democrats. we're going onto have a wide open field and it's exciting. >> we'll come back to the republicans in a minute but e.j., how much vulnerability does president obama have as you extend out a little bit. you can look at six month chunks and see how vulnerable he'll be going into 2012? >> if the economy doesn't move between now and 2012, he's very vulnerable. he knows that. everyone knows that one of the keys is do we begin to have growth. we're going to still have high
4:49 am
unemployment. does the president prepare people for we're going to come back but thought where we want to be but we're getting better. that's a critical thing. it will also depend who the republican nominee is. ed is right a vigorous fight can be very good for a party. a divisive fight can be very bad for the party. does sarah palin run? if she runs, there is a stop palin movement of some kind. if that happens, what does that do to the enthusiasm on the right of the republican party. we don't know any of that. >> let's talk about the map. we were having a debate about the role of government. this is from "politico." rob collins, president of the american action network, a gop friendly group set up support conservatives said i understandents willing to give obama a chance in 2008 to have left him for good over the stimulus.
4:50 am
mayor nutter, the middle of the electorate was with the president. they have moved away from the president. how do you get him back? is it a fight with republicans over slashing spending, dealing with the debt? what is that road to political recovery? >> first, david, at this moment in time, president obama's numbers are better than ronald reagan, george bush and bill clinton at this point in their presidencies and many of them had much better economies while they were functioning as president. so everyone has taken into account bad times, tough times. here is a president who walked into this. things were bad when he showed up. the day he was sworn in, it was already tough. he has two years. a lot can happen in politics in two years. first of all, we're seeing signs moving in the right directions in philadelphia. if some of these commentators
4:51 am
would get out they would see this going on all across america. companies moving into philadelphia, expanding, using economic recovery dollars putting people to work but also inspiring businesses to invest more, which is really what this program is all about. the president being on the ground in those cities, in those areas where people are starting to see it be feel it, experience it. a lot is going to happen, '10 into '11, '11 will start the surge back into '12. it will be a different landscape. >> in terms of people in the city, in the counties, surging out in terms of a vote, people are disspirited? >> i will suggest to you we astounded pundits and prognosticators, 42% turned out, 82% for the top two candidates for governor and senator in philadelphia. so folks understand what the president is going through, what he's all about. that will experience and go out into the county atmosphere well. >> let me come back to peggy on this. the palin factor is big in a lot
4:52 am
of ways like e.j. suggested. does she run and what impact does she have by threatening to run on the rest of the field as you look at republican numbers. >> let me just say before that, i think obama lost the center during health care because he seemed not to be moderate. his great hope now is that the republicans in power will, in comparison, make him look moderate. if they overstep that could happen and that could save him. as for palin, everybody is waiting to see what her plans are. she's in iowa now on her book tour. i thought your question to me was going to be why is she in iowa, and i was going to answer, so we will all talk about why she's in iowa. nobody knows what she's going to do. my own personal opinion, my guess, actually, is that she will not run. until she decides she is or she isn't, she freezes things up, takes the oxygen out of the
4:53 am
room. a lot of guys thinking about running will hold back and watch and see what she does. >> ed gillespie, it's not just palin but also the tea party influence and how republicans perform over the next six months to a year, right, that might determine who they want their standard bearer to be and where they want the center of power. even if she doesn't run, she will still command a lot of attention. >> absolutely. she drives coverage and drives agenda. looks the fact is from a republican perspective, from republicans in congress and those seeking nomination, the good news is we're not whip sawed between our base and the middle of the electorate. most independents are with republicans on taxes, jobs, economy. the democrats are whip sawed again their base and the vast majority of voters in the middle. that's what you're saying right now, david. it's not so much how we're talking about things but what we're talking about. we talked about lame duck, they are agenda is gays in the military, subsidies for college, s.t.a.r.t. treaty with russia, new environmental regulations
4:54 am
and fda reform. and most americans -- >> groups like yours that spent a lot of money in the last election have to say where the money came from. >> do you think most americans are at the water coolers saying, please pass the disclosure. they are not talking about the jobs and economy, the fact is obama, reid and pelosi have their fingers on the pulse of the country, i'm just not sure which countries. jobs, taxes, largest in the country in a few months and they have done nothing about it. >> you know what problem for republicans is they are whip sawed between a right wing that managed to nominate candidates in nevada, delaware, they need add write-in to save them in alaska. i think the interesting dynamic in the republican party is a lot of tabment republicans feel under enormous pressure from this right wing not to cave at all, not to mod
4:55 am
[ male announcer ] 100 potato chips or 100 pringles. both cost the same, but only the pringles superstack can makes everything pop! ♪ ♪ whoa-oh-oh-oh ♪ yeah, yeah
4:56 am
♪ hey, hey [ male announcer ] the choice is yours... 100 of these or 100 pringles. same cost but a lot more fun. everything pops with the pringles superstack can! ♪
4:57 am
4:58 am
couple of quick pieces, ed gless by, just a button up to the 2012 discussion. you've been around the white house when a sitting president thinks about a re-election. how does the president go about this, play against type, where he looks at that landscape and tries to be successful. >> he's got to be concerned about the great lakes, the results of the election in pennsylvania, ohio, michigan, wisconsin, indiana. and he's got to be thinking what am i going to do. i think that comes back to the question of jobs, david, especially in the industrial midwest. if i were the president in this white house, i would be thinking
4:59 am
how do we reconnect with those voters in the great lakes, because it's hard to see a path to re-election without picking up those states. >> the map does narrow when you think about the whole country. >> last but not least mayor nutter, i've been saving the sports news rocking the city of philadelphia. i know what you're thinking and it's not that. philadelphia phillies could not hold onto their coach, number 15 there with the skipper. he's now returning to los angeles where he returns to be the first base coach for my los angeles dodgers. he's finally back. it's a stunning blow to the city of philadelphia. how did this happen? and i'm just happy it did. >> i'm happy that you're happy. we have an agreement. he doesn't tell me how to run the city, i don't tell him how to run the team. >> has the